Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Presumptively Awful: How The Federal Government Is Failing To Protect The Constitutional Rights Of Those Adjudicated As Mentally Ill, As Illustrated By The 18 U.S.C. § 922(G)(4) Circuit Split, Kaitlyn M. Rubcich
Pepperdine Law Review
The Third, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits are split as to whether the 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) federal firearms ban violates the Second Amendment rights of those who were once adjudicated as mentally ill but have since returned to good mental health. In Beers v. Attorney General, the Third Circuit applied its own unique framework and held that § 922(g)(4) is constitutional. Meanwhile, the Sixth Circuit applied intermediate scrutiny in Tyler v. Hillsdale County Sheriff’s Department and deemed the statute unconstitutional, while in Mai v. United States, the Ninth Circuit also applied intermediate scrutiny but held that § 922(g)(4) is constitutional. …
State Laws For Due Process Hearings Under The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Iv: Expedited Hearings, Andrew M.I. Lee, Perry A. Zirkel
State Laws For Due Process Hearings Under The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act Iv: Expedited Hearings, Andrew M.I. Lee, Perry A. Zirkel
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
This article is a follow-up to a triad of analyses of state law additions to the basic requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) for due process hearings (DPHs). The former three articles covered the pre-hearing, hearing, and post-hearing stages of IDEA DPHs. The present article focuses on expedited DPHs, canvassing state law provisions specific to this more rapid, specialized proceeding in the IDEA. This article covers IDEA foundational requirements for expedited DPHs, and then summarizes and codes the state law provisions that supplement the federal template. Additionally, this article provides a discussion of federal preemption of state …